Janusz Lewandowski, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I welcome in the name of the Commission the position of Parliament on the guidelines for 2013 and what is more I agree with the major points as presented by the rapporteur, Giovanni La Via.

Indeed, properly shaping the last budget of the multiannual perspective 2007-2013 is quite a challenge, as is shaping it in the context of overall consolidation of national finances.

Nowadays austerity and consolidation are not the only dimensions of the economic debate in Europe. What is next and what is equally important is how to boost investment, how to boost employment opportunities, especially for the younger generation and how to support small and medium-sized companies in Europe.

Here is the place and here is the added value of the European budget and here is the perspective we should also seek for the European budget in the discussions over 2013.

In order to properly shape the budget for 2013 we should take into account the logic of the multiannual perspective. It is a very well known logic.

Everything is moving late but moving at cruising speed at the end of the financial perspective and we should remember, as mentioned by the rapporteur, the lesson of 2011. Another important lesson is the full implementation of commitments and payments, but also more than 100% consumption and implementation in many areas, for example competitiveness and innovation – 135% implementation; lifelong learning – 107%; Social Fund – 111% of what was assumed for 2011. There is also the lesson of reimbursements. Bills for reimbursement came late in December. The inability of the Commission to pay what it should pay for legitimate projects in several countries is also affected by the crisis.

We are not able, due to the shortage of money, to repay Rome over EUR 2 billion, to repay Madrid more than EUR 2 billion and to repay more than EUR 1 billion to Athens. This is an important lesson for drawing up our draft budget for 2013 and I think for the conciliation procedure of 2013. There is also inflexibility over financial regulation; that is the inability to transfer what is underspent to what should be spent at the end of the year. These are the reasons for the cash-flow problem today and it cannot be repeated next year with the accumulation of all sorts of problems.

Therefore in 2013 we should be equally sensitive to negative priorities, that is what is under-implemented, but also how to boost the growth opportunities and investment opportunities for the younger generation via existing means at our disposal. Additionally we have to find a place for ITER financing and we also have to accommodate Croatia joining as Member State Number 28 as from July 2013.

Therefore, concerning the area of savings and to prove that we are really taking into account all sorts of things in the environment of today’s Europe, we must consider administration. That is why we should not grow in administration. In the Commission we are starting the programme of annual cuts, not waiting for the next financial perspective but starting for 2013 – 1% cuts in the administration of the Commission every year.

Let us hope that this time we are drawing on the lessons of experience and I count very much upon the wisdom of the people elected by the people, here in Parliament.

Richard Ashworth, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, this budget comes at a time when it is important to take into account the economic and budgetary constraints at national level. That means that it is going to be important to strike the right balance between austerity and sound, judicious investment.

In that respect, our rapporteur has set out a number of principles which we are happy to support. I strongly agree with his assertion that we need a budget that focuses on jobs and growth. He is right to point out that this is best achieved through clear prioritisation and targeted, coordinated investment amongst the Member States. In particular, I strongly agree with him that the key test for EU expenditure must be the creation of European added value.

We would also impress on him, however, the need for value for money. I would urge greater thought to be given to the efficiency of this budgetary process. Specifically, inaccurate budgeting and the growth in the ‘Reste à Liquider’ both lead to large sums of unspent money, both of which suggest that we should be looking for ways to increase flexibility in the budgeting process.

But the one point that is missing in this report is a commentary on the size of the budget. At a time when most of Europe is experiencing austerity and most of Europe’s governments are cutting expenditure, it is most important that we, too, show a determination to reduce our expenditure wherever possible. Can I therefore recommend to our rapporteur that in his future report he calls for a freeze in the size of the budget?

Marta Andreasen, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Mr President, we already know that billions in taxpayers’ money was wasted in financing the failed Lisbon Agenda, but the EU institutions will never admit their responsibility for helping to create this crisis. Instead, they are asking for more money from EU citizens to finance another failure to come: the 2020 Agenda. This is treating EU citizens as fools. When will this Parliament realise that stimulating growth and jobs requires much less red tape and much less pointless legislation? Why can this Parliament not admit that growth-targeted spending would be best directed at Member State level?

Year after year, this Parliament is happy to put more taxpayers’ money in the hands of the Commission, an institution which – as the auditors tell us – is unable to ensure the proper use of EU funding. Of course, the Commission never runs a deficit, and it never will, because it can always go back to the Member States and tax them more to balance its books.

If this House refuses to show common sense and responsibility, it will be the architect of its own downfall. I, for one, am calling on the British Government to reduce its contribution to the 2013 EU budget by 10% in comparison with this year’s contribution. However, when it comes to the UK coalition government, I will not be holding my breath.

"When government does not know what it is supposed to do, it ends up with trying to do everything. Liberty has never come from governments. The history of liberty is a history of limitations of government power, not the increase of it."

George Lyon (ALDE). - Mr President, it is vitally important that the EU budget is focused on addressing the economic and financial crisis. With EU countries sliding back into recession, it is vital that EU funds are efficiently targeted at jobs, growth and investment to try and turn the EU economies around. Austerity alone cannot rescue us from the current crisis.

The 2013 budget year will prove to be a very difficult one with, on the one hand, a real need for budgetary constraint and austerity but, on the other hand, significant demands for payments from Member States as we come to the end of this financial perspective. As the Commissioner pointed out, with at least EUR 5 billion of payments which were carried over from the last financial year, it is absolutely vital that the Commission get a clear idea of the likely drawdown for 2013 from Member States. There can be no surprises or else it is going to be very difficult to try and shape a sensible budget.

I would like to see us aim for a freeze in real terms of the 2013 budget but this must be tempered by the fact that we are nearing the end of the financial perspective and the budget must reflect that fact. I hope we can work constructively with the Commission to square that difficult circle.

Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). - Mr President, this document and others like it remind me of those quacks who used to travel around with a single patent medicine that would cure all illnesses. The EU medicine, of course, is further political and economic integration. The illness in this case is the current economic crisis, but it could just as easily have been domestic violence, international tension or painful haemorrhoids in the elderly. The remedy would still be further political and economic integration.

If you think that comparing the EU with travelling salesmen is unfair, listen to this: ‘Parliament … takes the view that austerity measures undertaken at national level should not lead to an equivalent decrease at EU level’. And this is the best bit: ‘since one euro spent at this level can generate savings in the 27 Member States’.

I once bought a second-hand car from somebody who asked me on what I was going to spend the money that he had saved me. To parody the words of Norman Tebbit about the EU: ‘if it talks like a spiv and acts like a spiv, perhaps it is a spiv’.

Janusz Lewandowski, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I am in agreement with the absolute majority of your comments. Just a short response to Ms Andreasen – Mr Hartong may stick to the habit of leaving the room before the answer comes – and also to Mr Brons.

Even in austerity you have to pay your bills, the electricity bills and the other bills, and the responsibility and credibility of the European budget lie precisely here. Our inability to repay, to reimburse to Athens, to Rome, to Madrid, to Lisbon, the countries under financial stress, money for what was accomplished, what was legitimate, is clearly inconsistent with the political declarations that we should supply; we should do our utmost within our means to help these countries to get out of the crisis.

I think that this simple truth could be our guide in the forthcoming procedure for 2013, but even with the best will in the world we are not able, given the pressure upon the budget, to repay all the outstanding commitments, and this is my short answer to Mr Zemke.

Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), in writing. It is a sensitive time to be discussing budgetary issues in current economic conditions. The guidelines for 2013 put forward by Mr La Via echo our previous calls for the Council to balance austerity with investment. We have repeatedly stated that economic recovery cannot be achieved by austerity alone. Promoting growth and job creation requires specific actions and enhanced budgetary efforts to support European competitiveness, innovation and SMEs. Entrepreneurship is another theme we should support, especially female entrepreneurs. International Women's Day reminded us of the great financial contribution women employers and business owners make to the economy. Supporting female entrepreneurs fits EU 2020 strategy. Another important issue is payments. I strongly urge EU Member States to reduce the level of payments for 2013. The level of payments should take account of actual budgetary needs and existing agreements with other countries and institutions. If payment levels are reduced, the EU’s ability to respect standing agreements and obligations will also be reduced. The 2013 guidelines should be seen as a tool to boost growth and ensure Europe is prepared to address future financial difficulties. We need to guarantee a responsible budget that will strike the right balance between our needs, our responsibilities and our commitments.